These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: Comparison of bacterial examinations between eosinophilic and neutrophilic chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps.
    Author: Hirotsu M, Kikuchi K, Kusunoki T, Kase K, Ono N, Ikeda K.
    Journal: Acta Otolaryngol; 2011 Sep; 131(9):997-1001. PubMed ID: 21612504.
    Abstract:
    CONCLUSION: We found no significant differences in the bacterial features of the maxillary sinuses between eosinophilic and neutrophilic chronic rhinosinusitis (CRS) with nasal polyps. OBJECTIVES: Since neutrophilic CRS is often influenced by a predisposition to bacterial infection, and eosinophilic CRS is likely to be developed by allergic antigens, differences in the microbiology between the two pathologies of CRS can be expected. The present study was designed to investigate the bacterial findings from the maxillary sinus in eosinophilic and neutrophilic CRS. METHODS: Seventy patients with CRS with nasal polyps were divided into eosinophilic and neutrophilic types based on histopathological observations of the nasal polyps. The specimens for bacterial culture were obtained from the maxillary sinus during endoscopic sinus surgery. RESULTS: In all, 29 and 41 patients were classified as having eosinophilic and neutrophilic CRS with nasal polyps, respectively. The isolation rate of bacteria showed no significant difference between eosinophilic (90%) and neutrophilic CRS (98%). Aerobic bacteria were found in 25 patients (86%) with eosinophilic CRS, which was not significantly different from that in neutrophilic CRS (40 patients, 98%). The isolation rate for aerobic and anaerobic bacteria showed no significant differences.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]